BREAKING: Supreme Court to Hear New Abortion Case

BREAKING: Supreme Court to Hear New Abortion Case November 13, 2015

On Friday, November 13, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the first new abortion case it’s considered since 2007. That was the year when the Court, in the case of Gonzales v. Carhart, ruled 5-4 to uphold a federal ban on partial-birth abortions.

Clothes HangerThis time, though, the case in question was brought by abortion advocates, who are challenging the constitutionality of Texas’ law requiring abortion clinics to comply with safety standards required at other medical facilities.

The Republican-backed law, which has not yet gone into effect, contains protections which are standard at other ambulatory surgical centers, such as doorways wide enough to permit a gurney to pass through.  Abortion practitioners must have admitting privileges at a local hospital within 30 miles–just like real doctors–so that they can care for their patients should there be complications requiring hospitalization.

And what do the self-described defenders of women have to say about this?

Are they pleased that women seeking to end an unplanned pregnancy will be assured of a proper facility and a licensed, trained physician?

Are they shocked by squalor in facilities which have inadequate disposal systems, and which keep aborted fetal remains in the staff refrigerator?

Are they concerned that there may be no equipment to treat a woman who suffers a medical emergency?

No–The liberals for whom the coat hanger symbolized “brutal, back-alley abortions” in the years before Roe v. Wade are today rallying to protect women’s right to kill their children in any old fleabag facility they choose.

Of the 44 abortion clinics operating in the state of Texas in 2014, more than half have closed, as safety restrictions have been implemented. Only 19 remain open, and the National Abortion Federation protests that there could be only 10 clinics remaining in the state, if the new restrictions are fully implemented.

That means that 34 (more than 77%) of the clinics which operated in 2014 did not meet basic safety standards.

I am pro-life. I oppose abortion, which is the killing of an innocent human being, at any time in any facility.

But for those of you who support so-called “women’s rights” and advocate for child-killing in the womb when it’s convenient, I have a question:


Why wouldn’t the National Abortion Federation want to guarantee the highest level of safety for its abortion-minded customers?

Why wouldn’t the National Organization for Women cry out for justice, demanding the highest quality care for abortive women?

Why wouldn’t the Democratic Party demand stringent oversight of all medical facilities, including those which cater specifically to the needs of women?

If they truly care about women, as they claim, I’d say they’ve got some ‘splainin’ to do.

Image:  By Paris 16 (Own work) [CC BY-SA 4.0 (], via Wikimedia Commons

Browse Our Archives

Close Ad